Jump to content

[1.12.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [16.1][28.05.2024][Mars Expedition WIP]

Beale

By Beale
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Djolox

Djolox

Posted
Posted
It can get even weirder ;)

https://a-a.d-cd.net/e6a214u-960.jpg

http://epizodsspace.no-ip.org/bibl/tm/1993/8/obl4.jpg

The Blue Bird also can carry a small screw-propelled ATV - it is used to reach places where truck itself cannot drive (heavy swamps, for example). Soyuz usually lands in Kazakh steppes, not far from Baikonur, so it is rarely used.

Sadly, it's impossible to recreate it in KSP without special plugins (and we don't actually need it since there are no realistic terrain in KSP).

So I will say only one thing. SOVIET VEHICLES ARE AMAZING!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheBedla

TheBedla

Posted
Posted

Congrats on the R7, Beale, can't wait to try it out.

One thing occurred to me - would you consider making a matching set of textures for Procedural Tanks? I have no idea how demanding that is, or how much of your previous work could be used for them, but it would be really awesome to have tanks of any size matching with your parts.

I do love the freedom procedural parts give me, but those textures look definitely sub-par compared to yours, and I think it is mostly a matter of style, not the procedural..ness?

On the subject of the 1.875 probe core - that would definitely come in handy for some missions, but I still imagine a drone core integrated in the docking command module of the FGB would be a more elegant solution.

Anyways, keep up the great work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
  • Author
Posted
"Do you use KIDS by any chance to scale thrust/ISP to FAR/NEAR settings?"

No I just use the rocket as given. I have KIDS, but I only use it on my 10x Kerbin install, where this rocket doesn't need it because it has the delta V to get to orbit just fine without the help.

It takes 3600 DV to get to orbit with NEAR. It takes about 4500 to get to orbit with stock aero. It takes 8.8 km/s to get to orbit with NEAR and 10x Kerbin. The rocket is pushing ~ twice the needed amount for stock. I don't think it is a good idea to put 7 tons on the top and then tweak until 4500 DV. Even though that will get your 7 tons to LKO just fine I think it will have unintended side effects like dropping the radial boosters 20 seconds into the flight. (Not that I did the math to see.)

I am not using the 3rd stage and leaving it off the rocket as I have overkill DV without it. That in turn means that I don't need as much take off thrust, which leads to 40% tweaked throttle in the VAB.

With the 50 kilo newtons less thrust and a bit less efficiency I might be able to use the 3rd stage.

Thanks for the feedback there! :)

Yeah, I think I just plain suck at ascent trajectories, and it really harms testing.

With 7,000m/s of Delta V, I still only manage to get a Soyuz into 500km x500km orbit (stock aero).

I should theoretically be able to get it to Duna...

There might be a good solution (see below).

Yes, with FAR, and only the two bottom stages, with a standard Soyuz TMA for payload.

I fly around Mach 1 for max dynamic pressure until upper atmo, then rev up, drop boosters and start gravity turn. But the boosters are still 1/2 full by then, I'm just carrying dead weight, so I guess the TRW is too high.

If I build it with 3 stages, TWR is more realistic but then I have way too much delta V. I guess it's okay for the LV to have a bit excess delta V since we're launching from equator instead of the Kerbin's equivalent of Kazakhstan, but not like double the necessary to LKO!

I guess you got the numbers from the real thing? That would make it unbalanced for Kerbin dimensions.

Hello! Thanks for the feedback!

I balanced the fuel amounts in terms of FL-800 tanks (I.E the centre stack is two FL-800 equivalents of fuel).

So it's still very much using Kerbal wet/dry ratios.

I'd like to maintain the TWR at a level so the core stage can atleast get over 1.2 TWR.

I think the TWR will be maintained, but I will look at reducing Delta-V somehow (Reduced fuel amounts / lower ISPs).

Haha!

Nice job!

My thoughts on the Thrust and/or ÃŽâ€v topic: I think the thrust for the core stage (stage 2) is good at 300. That lets the full Tantares "stack" have a TWR of about 1.5 after booster separation. Perhaps add a second config for the booster engines that have about 50-60% of the thrust of the core, but are otherwise the same part? That would differ from the real R-7, where the RD-107 and RD-108 are effectively the same (thrust-wise), but the dynamics of KSP are different from reality too.

Dropping atmospheric ISP slightly is a good solution to curtail the excess ÃŽâ€v. These are fairly early-game parts, and should be somewhat inline with the early stock parts for balance purposes. At the same time they should still be able to deliver a payload as heavy as the Tantares to a reasonable "station" orbit around Kerbin.

Ultimately if you change everything or change nothing I'll still be happy with it. ;)

Hi! Thanks for the feedback!

I think reducing atmo ISP is a very good idea actually! Didn't think of that...

Thanks!

huehue

Congrats on the R7, Beale, can't wait to try it out.

One thing occurred to me - would you consider making a matching set of textures for Procedural Tanks? I have no idea how demanding that is, or how much of your previous work could be used for them, but it would be really awesome to have tanks of any size matching with your parts.

I do love the freedom procedural parts give me, but those textures look definitely sub-par compared to yours, and I think it is mostly a matter of style, not the procedural..ness?

On the subject of the 1.875 probe core - that would definitely come in handy for some missions, but I still imagine a drone core integrated in the docking command module of the FGB would be a more elegant solution.

Anyways, keep up the great work!

Hi, thanks!

Sure I can give it a look! I made some procedural tank textures (Or I think maybe it was stretchy tank) textures ages ago, In a Kocmoc style I think.

Er, do you mean the Soyuz white/orange style or the grey style (or both :) )

Also, yeah I think putting RC in the TKS butt-end is the more elegant and simple solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ndiver

ndiver

Posted
Posted

Hi Beale, great job for the R7 ! :)

I was looking at some of the parts, and noticed the back docking port on your ATV. This feature is interesting as one of the evolution proposed for the ATV was to be a mini space station, as visible on this picture :

Cargo_Ascent_and_Return_Vehicle_docked_to_the_ISS.jpg

Hi-Res: http://www.esa.int/images/03_ATV_MSS_cutaway.jpg

The position of the thrusters on the ATV was designed considering this possible update.

Would it be possible to make a small switch (like in some parts of the B9 pack) that would allow in the hangar to switch the ATV from a cargo to a mini-space station configuration ? (meaning possibility to host one Kerbal inside, but possibly less ressources) :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hi Beale, great job for the R7 ! :)

I was looking at some of the parts, and noticed the back docking port on your ATV. This feature is interesting as one of the evolution proposed for the ATV was to be a mini space station, as visible on this picture :

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/Cargo_Ascent_and_Return_Vehicle_docked_to_the_ISS.jpg

Hi-Res: http://www.esa.int/images/03_ATV_MSS_cutaway.jpg

The position of the thrusters on the ATV was designed considering this possible update.

Would it be possible to make a small switch (like in some parts of the B9 pack) that would allow in the hangar to switch the ATV from a cargo to a mini-space station configuration ? (meaning possibility to host one Kerbal inside, but possibly less ressources) :)

Hi!

Yes the docking port was added for that proposal :)

But for the second part, it's sadly impossible without introducing dependencies, which I really am against, I hope people understand.

The only other way would be alternate parts (Which with texture sharing wouldn't be too bad).

Eh, we shall see :)

Soyuz Revisions

Less overall DV, better FX (But I am not satisfied with the look of it).

ef004f5cd4.jpg

b256482601.jpg

ee95c9664e.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ndiver

ndiver

Posted
Posted
Hi!

Yes the docking port was added for that proposal :)

But for the second part, it's sadly impossible without introducing dependencies, which I really am against, I hope people understand.

The only other way would be alternate parts (Which with texture sharing wouldn't be too bad).

Eh, we shall see :)

Yes, i understand the problem of dependencies. The modified part (that could be just a second .cfg file, the model being the same) could act as a Science Lab for example (it was its real goal).

Where I'm totally impressed is that with your parts and the stock ones, we can make all the considered variants of ATV or ATV-based modules !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheBedla

TheBedla

Posted
Posted
Er, do you mean the Soyuz white/orange style or the grey style (or both :) )

Having either (or both) would be great, it's just a matter of having a consistent style. I don't care too much about precisely matching the textures, more about maintaining a certain palette or scheme to have a consistent look across my craft.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
King Arthur

King Arthur

Posted
Posted
Yeah, I think I just plain suck at ascent trajectories, and it really harms testing.

With 7,000m/s of Delta V, I still only manage to get a Soyuz into 500km x500km orbit (stock aero).

I should theoretically be able to get it to Duna...

Perhaps you could employ MechJeb or kOS to automate the launch process? Putting aside "that" debate about autopilots, MechJeb or kOS would be able to produce repeatable and consistent results which would make your testing process a lot easier and more accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tg626

tg626

Posted
Posted

Well I've been testing the R-7 (Kemyorka 7) rocket and came to some conclusions.

Now, bear in mind that I am comparing it to the Vostok mod for Orbiter - and while I'm not a "rivet counter" to borrow a term from the TrainSim community, I do look for similar performance.

I came up with the following, it cuts down the trust of the higher power engine from 300Kn to 200Kn and results in a more reasonable amount of fuel left after a MechJeb ascent to a 175km orbit.

The core stage is manually dropped at MECO leaving the final stage (Stage 3 or Block E) to circularize. I place the MechJeb AR202 on the Block E stage so that I can then flip it retrograde and use it's ample remaining fuel to deorbit the stage.

Here's the MM file I made to alter the engines, note that it also restores the smoke trails:

@PART[TLV_Engine_A]{
	!EFFECTS {}
	!MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX] {}

	// --- FX definitions ---


	fx_exhaustFlame_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustLight_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, running
	fx_smokeTrail_light = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustSparks_flameout = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, flameout

	// --- Sound FX definition ---


	sound_vent_medium = engage
	sound_rocket_hard = running
	sound_vent_soft = disengage
	sound_explosion_low = flameout


	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngines
		thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
		exhaustDamage = True
		ignitionThreshold = 0.1
		minThrust = 0
		maxThrust = 200
		heatProduction = 380
		fxOffset = 0, 0, 0.1
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = LiquidFuel
					ratio = 0.9
			DrawGauge = True
		}
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = Oxidizer
			ratio = 1.1
		}
		atmosphereCurve
		{
			key = 0 350
			key = 1 310
		}
	}
}
@PART[TLV_Engine_B]
{
	!EFFECTS {}
	!MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX] {}

	// --- FX definitions ---


	fx_exhaustFlame_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustLight_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, running
	fx_smokeTrail_light = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustSparks_flameout = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, flameout

	// --- Sound FX definition ---


	sound_vent_medium = engage
	sound_rocket_hard = running
	sound_vent_soft = disengage
	sound_explosion_low = flameout


	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngines
		thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
		exhaustDamage = True
		ignitionThreshold = 0.1
		minThrust = 0
		maxThrust = 190
		heatProduction = 360
		fxOffset = 0, 0, 0.1
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = LiquidFuel
				ratio = 0.9
			DrawGauge = True
		}
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = Oxidizer
			ratio = 1.1
		}
		atmosphereCurve
		{
			key = 0 380
			key = 1 335
		}
	}
}

It appears that the stock R-7 configs are set up for HotRockets, which I don't have installed. IMHO they should be made as stock engines and then have a MM file included to alter them to work with HotRockets only if HotRockets is installed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Beale, the R-7 is beautiful!

Korolev cross powered by separatrons:

http://i.imgur.com/RWBy1WE.png

And do you remember the Eve explorer mission? They have finally arrived!

http://i.imgur.com/1RRYFCf.png

Thanks!

I do remember, and it is good to see results! :cool:

Next: land and return :sticktongue:

Yes, i understand the problem of dependencies. The modified part (that could be just a second .cfg file, the model being the same) could act as a Science Lab for example (it was its real goal).

Where I'm totally impressed is that with your parts and the stock ones, we can make all the considered variants of ATV or ATV-based modules !

Oh, I would for sure want a couple of windows and stuff :)

Having either (or both) would be great, it's just a matter of having a consistent style. I don't care too much about precisely matching the textures, more about maintaining a certain palette or scheme to have a consistent look across my craft.

Thanks!

Okay, here you go.

tavio.tga

And then add to PP texture config.

Tavio
	{
		// TLV Skin
		sides
		{
			texture = ProceduralParts/Parts/tavio
			uScale = 2.0
			vScale = 1.0
			shininess = 0.6
			specular = 0.4, 0.4, 0.4
		}
		ends
		{
			texture = ProceduralParts/Parts/ends
		}
	}

Perhaps you could employ MechJeb or kOS to automate the launch process? Putting aside "that" debate about autopilots, MechJeb or kOS would be able to produce repeatable and consistent results which would make your testing process a lot easier and more accurate.

Yes, I think I must :)

Well I've been testing the R-7 (Kemyorka 7) rocket and came to some conclusions.

Now, bear in mind that I am comparing it to the Vostok mod for Orbiter - and while I'm not a "rivet counter" to borrow a term from the TrainSim community, I do look for similar performance.

I came up with the following, it cuts down the trust of the higher power engine from 300Kn to 200Kn and results in a more reasonable amount of fuel left after a MechJeb ascent to a 175km orbit.

The core stage is manually dropped at MECO leaving the final stage (Stage 3 or Block E) to circularize. I place the MechJeb AR202 on the Block E stage so that I can then flip it retrograde and use it's ample remaining fuel to deorbit the stage.

Here's the MM file I made to alter the engines, note that it also restores the smoke trails:

@PART[TLV_Engine_A]{
	!EFFECTS {}
	!MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX] {}

	// --- FX definitions ---


	fx_exhaustFlame_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustLight_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, running
	fx_smokeTrail_light = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustSparks_flameout = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, flameout

	// --- Sound FX definition ---


	sound_vent_medium = engage
	sound_rocket_hard = running
	sound_vent_soft = disengage
	sound_explosion_low = flameout


	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngines
		thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
		exhaustDamage = True
		ignitionThreshold = 0.1
		minThrust = 0
		maxThrust = 200
		heatProduction = 380
		fxOffset = 0, 0, 0.1
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = LiquidFuel
					ratio = 0.9
			DrawGauge = True
		}
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = Oxidizer
			ratio = 1.1
		}
		atmosphereCurve
		{
			key = 0 350
			key = 1 310
		}
	}
}
@PART[TLV_Engine_B]
{
	!EFFECTS {}
	!MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX] {}

	// --- FX definitions ---


	fx_exhaustFlame_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustLight_blue = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, running
	fx_smokeTrail_light = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, running
	fx_exhaustSparks_flameout = 0.0, -0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, flameout

	// --- Sound FX definition ---


	sound_vent_medium = engage
	sound_rocket_hard = running
	sound_vent_soft = disengage
	sound_explosion_low = flameout


	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngines
		thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
		exhaustDamage = True
		ignitionThreshold = 0.1
		minThrust = 0
		maxThrust = 190
		heatProduction = 360
		fxOffset = 0, 0, 0.1
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = LiquidFuel
				ratio = 0.9
			DrawGauge = True
		}
		PROPELLANT
		{
			name = Oxidizer
			ratio = 1.1
		}
		atmosphereCurve
		{
			key = 0 380
			key = 1 335
		}
	}
}

It appears that the stock R-7 configs are set up for HotRockets, which I don't have installed. IMHO they should be made as stock engines and then have a MM file included to alter them to work with HotRockets only if HotRockets is installed.

Okay! This is an interesting config!

Ehm, I will give it a go when I have some free time. It might be a solution to the balance issues :)

I am knee deep in coding an N-body simulator for my dissertation, so I might not be able to do any kerbal stuff for a little while :(

ad47821d19.png

Was able to use one of your parts to make this little guy:

http://i.imgur.com/D5t7Gx9.jpg

An interesting concept from the earlier days of spaceflight. Almost like a mini TKS!

One Man Space Station

Very cool!

And I had never heard of the concept prior! Thanks!

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SnowWhite

SnowWhite

Posted
Posted

Hi everyone!

Here's much more better N-1 LK/LOK mission. Sorry, not everything is so brilliant as it could be, N-1 is just uncontrolable!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

tg626, Very nice job, really! :wink: But...

R-7 (Kemyorka 7)

My face, when I read this:

WPpvWVvQoe8.jpg

Semyorka-7 in English means "Seven-7". Sounds very... bad. So, only two ways to say: "Semyorka" (Nickname of the rocket) or "R-7".

Ok, ok! I am too grouchy for now. In any case, well done!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Wow, thanks! Beale, the Friendly Neighbourhood Modder! :cool:

And good luck for your n-body work!

No Problemo :) And thanks!

Hi everyone!

Here's much more better N-1 LK/LOK mission. Sorry, not everything is so brilliant as it could be, N-1 is just uncontrolable!

http://imgur.com/a/ewZqe

Wow, nice mission!

I really like the N1 design you have there.

Couple of questions:

- Where did you get the nice Orlan (I think?) EVA suits.

- What are those cool grainy camera effects?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Can we just see vostok 3rd stage before you go?

But, there is nothing to show yet! :confused:

It's texture pack for Texture Replacer. But its lightmaps are broken in 0.25 version. Just look at the old screen was taken in 0.24.2.

http://i.imgur.com/KW58eAB.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/o9hJcpc.jpg

It is one of the cameras in Hullcam VDS.

Thanks!

These are two things I have wanted for a while!

Your album have convinced me we need a Block D, also .

Tantares LV 3.1

The TWR issue: I still need to sit down and take a look at this.

This is just a quick fix to add smoke FX and larger shock exhaust to the lower stage.

Also, the lower stage engine has slightly lower Atmo ISP, which brings the total DV of the TLV (With Soyuz payload) to under 6,000m/s.

Thanks guys, for the great feedback! :)

A lander delivered to "Juno" (Courtesy of Kopernicus Mod) by the TLV.

6f597a1021.jpg

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raptor22

Raptor22

Posted
Posted

Houston, we have a problem.

The parachute for the soyuz module comes out upside down, so the cable clips through the capsule and looks like it's hanging upside-down. I wish that I could post a picture, but the forum will only let me put web addresses. Is there an easy way for me to fix this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Leszek

Leszek

Posted
Posted
Houston, we have a problem.

The parachute for the soyuz module comes out upside down, so the cable clips through the capsule and looks like it's hanging upside-down. I wish that I could post a picture, but the forum will only let me put web addresses. Is there an easy way for me to fix this?

I am trying to figure out how you did that.

Make sure that you just have two parts at this stage, the parachute and the capsule. The orbital module and the service module should have been jettisoned some time ago. The orbital module by clicking on the parachute and decoupling and the service module by way of Tantares stage separator. Make sure your SAS is off.

If that doesn't help, post pics, try with dropbox or something it is free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kenbobo

kenbobo

Posted
Posted

uuuuhhhh

this

EB85B5F7C11A6F613C0C81B49A1F83B236521C2A

If i remember from a presentation from HarvesteR himself, the game has 3 different scenes.

Internal, External and Scaled.

I think the game had a brain fart and the Internal merged into external.

Also, the place is Eve, the mods are Roverdude's warp drive, the procedural parts, tantares. Thats all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chadley123

Chadley123

Posted
Posted

This has probably been discussed before, but I want to convey a wish of mine in the nicest way possible: I wish these parts were bigger. Normally, I would just find another mod like Homegrown rockets, which is fine and good on it's own. But I like these parts far better than Homegrown rockets. Tantares has it's own unique style and has a lot more of the soviet vehicles that I love. I would love Tantares to have a larger scale for the plain and simple experience of going on EVA and seeing a big vehicle or station and being blown away as to how that even got into space. (Also, the kerbals look really cramped in that capsule.) However, I do realize that Beale is an artist, and I really don't want to take Beale away from his vision and direction from were he wants Tantares to go. I am not going to stop using the mod because the mod maker doesn't want to incorporate every little thing people write on his thread.

The new rockets look amazing and have been nothing but smooth sailing. I really appreciate how the boosters decouple in such a manner that I do not need to add ugly separatrons. Thank you for making this mod, Beale!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tg626

tg626

Posted
Posted (edited)
Houston, we have a problem.

The parachute for the soyuz module comes out upside down, so the cable clips through the capsule and looks like it's hanging upside-down. I wish that I could post a picture, but the forum will only let me put web addresses. Is there an easy way for me to fix this?

Try the file I posted at the bottom of this page: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/81537-0-25-Tantares-Stockalike-Soyuz-and-MIR-12-1-2-Crew-1-25m-Pod-R-7-Release%21?p=1550948

It fixes a bug in a config provided in RealChute.

Actually, you can get it in this ZIP

http://sourcebox.federalproductions.com/FP-Tantares_TLV_Tweaks_1_0.zip

Inside is "Tantares_Extras_RealChute.cfg" which should fix the upside down parachute behavior.

FP-Tantares_TLV_Tweaks.cfg is a ModuleManager tweak file to give the Beta R-7 (aka "TLV") more R-7-esque performance (IMHO), it corrects the flames/missing smoke, cuts back the thrust of the high trust engine, and reduces the fuel of the A/B/C tanks so they are depleted at a more reasonably point in a flight (And are more consistent with the physical capacities of the stock tanks).

Edited by tg626
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...